This is truly the ihatetrump forum with a constant subtext of thereoughtabeacoup because we wanted Hil to win. She lost. It's not being handled well. Perhaps we should follow the practice of gummit schools calling in counselors.

When I woke up the Wednesday after the election and saw that trump had won, I thought it might be difficult for my mod/lib dem friends here. I had no idea. Obama won twice to my great disappointment. I didn't think eight years of spewing hate over it was a wise course for me personally. We all make our choices.

And William is the alwayslooktheotherwayguy when it comes to any Republican President no matter how crude, self-laudatory, recreationally-centered, and merciless that Prez might be.

Consider Trump's 18 tweets to Puerto Ricans in the last day (actually form 7:19 a.m. and ending at 6:46 p.m Saturday). Who says he can’t work while golfing?

The trouble is that “work” (his work, not what he commanded) is all about self congratulation and arguing points, and not being presidential by showing mercy towards the badly hurting.

What's more remarkable than Donald Trump -- aka the commander in chief, aka the most most powerful person in the country -- tapping out 18 tweets on a single subject in less than 12 hours is the tone of those tweets: Negative, defensive and dark.

It all began with Trump's slashing attack on San Juan Mayor Carmen Yulin Cruz, who has become the face of the humanitarian crisis in Puerto Rico -- thanks in no small part to her interview Friday on CNN's "New Day" in which she angrily denounced attempts by the Trump White House to present the situation in Puerto Rico as a "good news story.”

Trump, already worried about the perception that he and his administration have responded inadequately to the situation, responded to Yulin Cruz the only way he knows how: Viciously.

At a time of crisis for more than 3 million Americans living in Puerto Rico, their President decided to pick a fight with a local official due to her frustration with the recovery efforts. Rather than send a tweet urging patience (or maybe not tweeting at all!), Trump decided the best course of action was to go after Yulin Cruz and "others in Puerto Rico" for their allegedly poor job in dealing with Hurricane Maria.

The words Trump used are telling. "They want everything to be done for them," he tweeted. "They"? You mean the millions of American citizens in Puerto Rico? And the not-so-subtle suggestion of laziness in Trump's tweets is just more of the same racially coded language that the President has trafficked in since the day he announced his campaign.

Had Trump sent only those three tweets hitting Yulin Cruz, it would have been a bad -- but not atypical -- day for him. But, he didn't stop there. Not even close.

Trump spent the next eight(!) hours tweeting a series of attacks against the so-called "fake news" media for allegedly misrepresenting the actions of his administration in Puerto Rico.

Trump provided no evidence for his claims. Or, really, explained what he meant by them.

Why was Trump doing this? I think the article above hits the nail on the head:

What Trump is doing -- in his attacks on Yulin Cruz and the media -- is trying to divide the country as a way to deflect blame for his administration's performance."They" are lazy and want everything done for them. "They" are being nasty because Democrats told them to. "They" aren't rooting for our first responders. "They" are trying to convince people that our soldiers aren't doing a good job.

Trump's willingness to divide, to turn every situation in which he is questioned or criticized into an "us" vs "them" is well documented by now. The 2016 election was an 18-month master class in how to divide the country for your own political gain. Trump's handling of the white supremacist violence in Charlottesville, Virginia, and his deliberate decision to pick a fight with (mostly black) NFL players over the national anthem illustrate that same perpetual need to divide.

That default divisiveness makes Trump different than every person who has held the office before him. For the 43 previous presidents, their ultimate goal was to find ways to remind people in the country of our common humanity, to take the high road, to appeal to our better angels. Many of them missed that mark -- often badly -- but it was always their North Star.

It is not for Trump. Not close. For Trump, the lone goal is winning at all costs. If that means attacking the mayor of San Juan even as Puerto Rico faces a historic recovery challenge, so be it. If it means blaming Puerto Rico's debt and infrastructure issues even as people are desperately searching for their loved ones, well, that's just how it goes. If it means trying to build the media up as a scapegoat to cover up a slower-than-ideal response to Maria's aftermath? Consider it done!

I also note that the Jones Act was immediately waived for Harvey and Irma within a few hours (oil was involved). Waiving the Jones Act for Puerto Rico was explicitly denied on Wednesday Sept 27 - landfall was Sept 20. Amid public pressure he did waive the Jones Act on Sept 28. That act had prevented non-American ships from bringing supplies to Puerto Rico and the US Virgin Islands.

Early Wednesday, the Department of Homeland Security used a conference call with reporters to address one of the sorest points: a decision not to waive a little-known shipping law called the Jones Act for Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands, the way the department had for areas affected by two previous storms. The law requires that all goods shipped from one American port to another be carried on American-registered ships with American crews.

During Hurricanes Harvey and Irma, the department waived the Jones Act’s restrictions so that foreign tankers could carry oil from the Gulf of Mexico to refineries on the East Coast, making up for pipelines that had been damaged by the storms. Waiving the law now would allow foreign cargo ships to carry supplies to the devastated islands from the American mainland. But Homeland Security officials defended their decision not to do so, saying on Wednesday that there were enough American ships to do the job and that the law’s restrictions should be set aside only when national security is at stake.

KeithE wrote:And William is the always looktheotherwayguy when it comes to any Republican President no matter how crude, self-serving and merciless that Prez might be.

Ed: So Keith would, you give us an example of William looking the other way in respect to any thing Trump has said or done.

It seems you just can not get past the truth of Williams repeating "Hillery lost Trump won." Show me any where that William has suggested that any one over look Trump's crudities.

Some battles are worth fighting, some are not.

That’s the thing - William nearly always supports the president against very legitimate issues concerning Trump’s bad words/bad actions/“crudities" brought up here on BL. Virtually every time he looks they other way by saying “get over it - she lost” or words to that effect. Seldom does he consider the goodness/badness of Trump words/actions or btw any Bush actions.

You asked for an example - this topic is one of many hundreds. You can look up the others.

What I "can not get past” is Trump’s arrogance, corruption, serial falsehoods, lack of compassion, ugly tweets, picking fights ... (need I go on). That battle is worth fighting.

But the fight with William, that is inconsequential. So why don’t you ask William to drop the “get over it - she lost” line as well as asking me to ignore William. It's because you are among the looktheotherway crowd. BTW I have never voted for Hillary because I "looked into" her very militaristic/interventionist tone and her casualness in handling potentially classified info.

Informed by Data.Driven by the SPIRIT and JESUS’s Example.Promoting the Kingdom of GOD on Earth.

KeithE wrote:But the fight with William, that is inconsequential. So why don’t you ask William to drop the “get over it - she lost” as well as asking me to ignore William. It’s because you are among the looktheotherway crowd. BTW I have never voted for Hillary.

That's an easy question to answer...

The evidence here shows that you and others here are not over the winning of Trump. Whether you voted for Hillary or not... she was the other candidate. She lost. She's touring on the cheesy whine book sale... hooking so many people for more money from those who have not gotten over the fact Hillary lost and Trump won.

I think William has the facts straight and you know it and because he does you want to make him the enemy. Sorta like HRC making the video the blame for Benghazi. Smoke and mirrors.

This is truly the ihatetrump forum with a constant subtext of thereoughtabeacoup because we wanted Hil to win. She lost. It's not being handled well. Perhaps we should follow the practice of gummit schools calling in counselors.

When I woke up the Wednesday after the election and saw that trump had won, I thought it might be difficult for my mod/lib dem friends here. I had no idea. Obama won twice to my great disappointment. I didn't think eight years of spewing hate over it was a wise course for me personally. We all make our choices.

I'm so glad that you are here to keep everyone straight, interpret what everyone is thinking, and lay down the hypocrisy so thick. Henceforth, I suggest to the moderators that we drop the "Prayer Request" forum, and replace it with a "Dear William, set us straight" forum. Not that William ever participated in any of the Ihaveobama pile of crap that occurred here for eight years.

KeithE wrote:But the fight with William, that is inconsequential. So why don’t you ask William to drop the “get over it - she lost” as well as asking me to ignore William. It’s because you are among the looktheotherway crowd. BTW I have never voted for Hillary.

That's an easy question to answer...

The evidence here shows that you and others here are not over the winning of Trump. Whether you voted for Hillary or not... she was the other candidate. She lost. She's touring on the cheesy whine book sale... hooking so many people for more money from those who have not gotten over the fact Hillary lost and Trump won.

I think William has the facts straight and you know it and because he does you want to make him the enemy. Sorta like HRC making the video the blame for Benghazi. Smoke and mirrors.

You keep dwelling on that and thinking that, Jon. That's a predictable reply from someone who never provides any facts or backup for a single thing you say.

KeithE wrote:But the fight with William, that is inconsequential. So why don’t you ask William to drop the “get over it - she lost” as well as asking me to ignore William. It’s because you are among the looktheotherway crowd. BTW I have never voted for Hillary.

That's an easy question to answer...

The evidence here shows that you and others here are not over the winning of Trump. Whether you voted for Hillary or not... she was the other candidate. She lost. She's touring on the cheesy whine book sale... hooking so many people for more money from those who have not gotten over the fact Hillary lost and Trump won.

I think William has the facts straight and you know it and because he does you want to make him the enemy. Sorta like HRC making the video the blame for Benghazi. Smoke and mirrors.

What facts? William just pronounces his opinions and gives putdown lines like “get over it - she lost” or what his “mod/libs friends” get wrong (again w/o supporting evidence or reasoning). I provide mucho muy more facts that he does. Somehow I doubt he reads much of it, since his retorts are not specific to the facts/DATA that I research and place on BL. In fact he even has admitted he does not look at and/or digest plots I provide.

Informed by Data.Driven by the SPIRIT and JESUS’s Example.Promoting the Kingdom of GOD on Earth.

KeithE wrote:But the fight with William, that is inconsequential. So why don’t you ask William to drop the “get over it - she lost” as well as asking me to ignore William. It’s because you are among the looktheotherway crowd. BTW I have never voted for Hillary.

That's an easy question to answer...

The evidence here shows that you and others here are not over the winning of Trump. Whether you voted for Hillary or not... she was the other candidate. She lost. She's touring on the cheesy whine book sale... hooking so many people for more money from those who have not gotten over the fact Hillary lost and Trump won.

I think William has the facts straight and you know it and because he does you want to make him the enemy. Sorta like HRC making the video the blame for Benghazi. Smoke and mirrors.

What facts? William just pronounces his opinions and gives putdown lines like “get over it - she lost” or what his “mod/libs friends” get wrong (again w/o supporting evidence or reasoning). I provide mucho muy more facts that he does. Somehow I doubt he reads much of it, since his retorts are not specific to the facts/DATA that I research and place on BL. In fact he even has admitted he does not look at and/or digest plots I provide.

The FACT that the way some here present in their comments about Trump a total disrespect, with a twist of he's wrong no matter what he does with their progressive agenda attached to it says to others... they are not over it.

If Trump discovered the cure for cancer, some would say he was a day late and X# of lives were lost in the last 24 hours so he hates people with cancer. If he were a better President he would not have delayed. For all the progressive political Frank Sanatra's out there... you don't always get to...

To Ed Pettibone, Keith wrote:But the fight with William, that is inconsequential. So why don’t you ask William to drop the “get over it - she lost” line as well as asking me to ignore William. It's because you are among the looktheotherway crowd. BTW I have never voted for Hillary because I "looked into" her very militaristic/interventionist tone and her casualness in handling potentially classified info.

Count me among those who recognizes that William is dead on correct. It's a completely indisputable fact that Hillary lost. She lost fair and square. You might as well just suck it up and get over it. You're driving yourself crazy with your moaning and groaning about William comments.

KeithE wrote:But the fight with William, that is inconsequential. So why don’t you ask William to drop the “get over it - she lost” as well as asking me to ignore William. It’s because you are among the looktheotherway crowd. BTW I have never voted for Hillary.

Jon Estes wrote:That's an easy question to answer...

The evidence here shows that you and others here are not over the winning of Trump. Whether you voted for Hillary or not... she was the other candidate. She lost. She's touring on the cheesy whine book sale... hooking so many people for more money from those who have not gotten over the fact Hillary lost and Trump won.

I think William has the facts straight and you know it and because he does you want to make him the enemy. Sorta like HRC making the video the blame for Benghazi. Smoke and mirrors.

KeithE wrote:What facts? William just pronounces his opinions and gives putdown lines like “get over it - she lost” or what his “mod/libs friends” get wrong (again w/o supporting evidence or reasoning). I provide mucho muy more facts that he does. Somehow I doubt he reads much of it, since his retorts are not specific to the facts/DATA that I research and place on BL. In fact he even has admitted he does not look at and/or digest plots I provide.

Sure, William does pronounce his opinions. I pronounce my opinions as well. Just as you, Sandy, Ed, Jon, and everyone else does. The “get over it - she lost” line isn't necessarily a putdown. Actually, it isn't a putdown. It's an indisputable fact. If you want to know the truth, Sandy is the master of the putdown line gig.

We're going through a cycle here. For eight years it was political conservatives ranting about every minute move President Obama made, whether there was any credibility to the remark or not, mostly not. Now Trump has done just about everything he criticized Obama or Clinton for doing, and the conservatives on this board have suddenly decided that's OK. Might be fun to cut and paste some of the previous commentary about Obama to Trump, and leave the names in place. It wouldn't look much different.

Seems like the worst thing in the world was that President Obama was on a golf course when a heavy rainstorm (not a hurricane) dropped a lot of rain on a river watershed in Texas, and some homes flooded near Houston. Even though the FEMA response was immediate, and the trucks and supplies had to wait a couple of days for the water to go down to get in there, because they arrived on the scene so quickly, and the disaster declarations were already declared and in place, we still saw the photos of the President on the golf course, where he probably spent a total of three hours, if the photos even matched the same time period. Now, in the middle of what has been a slow federal response to Puerto Rico, after a real hurricane, Trump spent four days at his golf resort in New Jersey. Pointing that out now becomes ihatetrump and trauma over Hillary not getting elected. Every time that gets posted, it just makes everything that was ever said about President Obama, or Hillary Clinton, to use a popular expression here, "baloney cheese."

Jon Estes wrote:Mark Twain will be the next book to burn. Others will come, then the Bible because it will be on the list. Can't have a bigotted (sic) God who doesn't let all people into His heaven. As long as man gets to define God, then they get to define who goes and who doesn't. I'm sure the left has a list of names they do not want in heaven. Such an intolerant group.

Wow, what a leap into fantasy conclusions. So you're suggesting that the racism and bigotry that worked its way into the culture, including into some of the literature it produced, should just be swept under the rug and ignored? And it's quite a leap from the works of Mark Twain to the Bible. Twain wrote from the perspective of the time and place in which he lived, which included a fair amount of bigotry based on race, which he accurately reflects, and by which he was also affected. I'm nor sure how we got from Trump spending four days at a golf resort while Puerto Rico suffers to burning Mark Twain, to man defining God, to the left determining who gets into heaven or not, but Jon gives a real good example of the kind of hysteria and victimization that the right uses for its straw-man enemies.

The Bible is always "on the list," threatened as much by twisting it out of context and using it as a weapon, as it is of being burned. There's already been a long history in this country, and in Europe, of its use by "the right" to justify all kinds of practices and philosophies and human definitions of "God", including slavery and racism. If you're going to equate the opposition to bigotry, racism and the injustice that it produces with some undefined, ambiguous, nebulous "left," you might as well be tearing out many of its pages.